Tuesday, August 16, 2011

Singapore. It appears, the Romanian has had the last laugh.

Sad as I am, of course, for the victims of his hit and run drunk driving spree in 2009 in Singapore, one cannot avoid stating the obvious.

Silviu Ionescu has had the last laugh.

And the fault, lies to a very great extent on Singapore.

I believe that Singapore's disgraced notoriety for the lack of the rule of law, the history of misusing the law to destroy a long list of Lee Kuan Yew's political opponents such as JB Jeyaretnam, Chee Soon Juan, Tang Liang Hong and Gopalan Nair has seriously damaged the reputation of it's legal system.

I understand that Silviu Ionescu's main argument in the Bucharest court against extradition was the lack of the rule of law in Singapore. I understand he used many of the articles in Singapore Dissident to buttress his claim that Singapore's legal system has been thoroughly compromised and he is unlikely to receive a fair trial if returned. I am gratified that Singapore Dissident has been of some use in disseminating internationally this sad fact, both in Romania and in the European Union. I think the world has a right to know the truth.

A judicial system like that in Singapore which can shamelessly misuse the law in political cases is not expected to behave impartially in any other case.

I understand that Ionescu has been punished in the Bucharest court.

I think he had a fair trial.

Let us not forget Romania is now a member of the European Union and subject to the laws of the union.

Remember, it is not Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore, a place where this 88 year old thug , Lee Kuan Yew, is running amok in the island.

Your letters are welcome. We reserve the right to publish your letters. Please Email your letters to nair.gopalan@yahoo.com And if you like what I write, please tell your friends. You will be helping democracy by distributing this widely. This blog not only gives information, it dispels government propaganda put out by this dictatorial regime.

3 comments:

Diplomatic immunity & a lack of extradition treaty have been used to explain why Ionescu cannot be sent back to Singapore for trial.

But a lot of questions remain unanswered.

1. Delay at his arrest. Did the Singapore Police got cold-feet at having to arrest a diplomat? I have seen Singapore Police trying to bully lesser people over elites.

2. Is Singapore really interested to pursue this case since the victims are not Singaporeans. They must be aware that with diplomatic immunity, they will have to do more than issue arrest warrants to bring him back. But why did it took half a year for Singapore Foreign minister to talk about this.

Singapore must have known that its bad standing as a kangaroo court will find doors slamming on its face. That is why it has to be so cautious so as not to attract too much attention.

I just hope that the victims of accused Ionescu's hit & run will realise that Singapore's bad reputation in jailing political dissidents means that they can only seek justice in a Romanian court.

somepeople have good reasons for the overstays like looseing your bill fold and no decent person returning it,,so you can get home,,,if the tourist or workers that bring in money to byour country and come to work for your country is treated unfair like your overstays then I wouldn't come back to do your country anddo any more favors..if they do have overstays its for a good reason,,,,you should treat it as so???

Followers

About Me

Determined to find the Truth.
Born Singapore, educated Winstedt School 2 (next to Monks Hill in Newton, Singapore) Raffles Institution, National Service, some travel in Europe, then law studies England, return to Singapore, practiced for 10 years, active Workers Party member, stood elections 1988 and 1991 in Singapore, was harassed and persecuted by Lee Kuan Yew for my political beliefs, left for USA, obtained asylum and admitted California State Bar, practice law ever since in Fremont California near San Francisco. Relinquished Singapore citizenship 2005 because I was not prepared to permit Lee Kuan Yew to unjustly retain my CPF funds if I remained Singapore Citizen. On principle, the only correct thing for me to do was to give it up, for my CPF funds. I am an American Citizen as of 2004.